I guess this is the part that puzzles me... These people aren't superhuman. They're only royalty because people believe them to be... Society has deemed them to be royalty. They weren't even elected into the position... They're just born or marry into it. It's nothing you earn. And what you earn is a lavish lifestyle on other people's dimes... many many many dimes.

I think it's difficult to comprehend if you don't have a royal family in the country you live in. I have a lot of friends who are democratic to the point of being socialists, but they still have this certain respect for the royal family. It's such an old institution and the royal family is just a part of Denmark. It's is an old myth that a royal family is expensive, in the matter of fact a Prime Minister cost far more (not even to mention the costs of a President *whistles*). Besides, the royal family contributes in import and export, they "sell" the country and they're the representative face of a country from the outside. They also unites the nation (well, the world even - if you look at HM's DiamondJubilee or William and Catherine's wedding), the royal family is a constant, it's been there always. Dame HelenMirren once said that HM and her sister are the only two she knows today who "been there" throughout her entire life. You're right, royalty is something society has deemed them to be. But that's democracy, it's only in countries like Bahrain that it would ever work to have a royal family without the support of the majority of the public.

Whether you support royalty or not, the fact is that this child will is very likely be the future head of state of a number of countries, as well as the head of the church of England. His/Her name will be on coins, stamps, and newspapers for the next 80 years or more (not to mention history books!) - it will have significant historical, political and social impact. From a name-nerds point of view, that's pretty interesting! And it's hardly an exaggeration to say this is will be the most famous child in the world - if they pick a more unusual name (say Athelstan or Georgiana), it's very likely that will afect naming trends.

It's is an old myth that a royal family is expensive, in the matter of fact a Prime Minister cost far more (not even to mention the costs of a President *whistles*).

Ehh... I'd have to really disagree with that statement. Aren't the royal finances grossly underreported? And even if they aren't underreported, doesn't the British monarchy itself report that it costs around £40 million to maintain?! Is that yearly?! If so, our President isn't even worth close to that amount of money. However, if you guys are happy financing their privileged lifestyle and lavish travels to "sell" your country, then so be it.

I think most Americans aren't happy with the compensation our government officials receive. Many of us would like to change that. We would love to eliminate wasteful spending and all the "hands in the cookie jar." The somewhat silver lining is that we aren't stuck with them for a lifetime. We get to vote them in or out and impeach them if necessary. It doesn't weed out all of the underqualified elected officials, but I think it's great to have that option.

Listen, I'm happy for any healthy baby to be born to two loving parents, but I realize that this baby is being born into a tax-funded life of privilege that he or she will never have to earn. That would make me mad to finance that privileged life, but luckily it doesn't directly affect my wallets. Each addition to that family should be looked at as extra tax money to dish out. But, I'm just an American.... what do I know.